AGENDA FOR JUNE 28, 2007
This information is given to you as a courtesy. Comments and opinions are accepted. Your attendance at the commission hearing is encouraged.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: Time will be set aside during the Public Hearing to receive oral comments on all items listed as Public Hearings. Staff will present the project and staff recommendation and answer questions from the Planning Commissioners. The applicant will then have the opportunity to raise any issues with the staff recommendation. The public will then be invited to approach the podium to provide up to three (3) minutes of public testimony.
1. Planning Commission open public hearing, receive public testimony and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- recommending City Council consideration of an amendment to the Marina Municipal Code and Local Coastal Program that will delete in its entirety Title 16 Subdivisions and replace it with a new Title 16 Subdivisions.
2. Planning Commission open public hearing, receive public testimony and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- recommending City Council consideration of an amendment to the Marina Municipal Code and Local Coastal Program that will delete in its entirety Chapters 17.41 SU or Coastal Zone Secondary Use Combining District and 17.43 C-P or Coastal Development Permit Combining District and replace with a new Chapter 17.41 Coastal Zoning.
3. Planning Commission open public hearing, receive public testimony and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- recommending City Council consideration of an amendment to the Marina Municipal Code and Local Coastal Program that will change the Local Coastal Plan Land Use designation and zoning of two sites to achieve consistency with the General Plan Land Use Map.
4. Planning Commission open public hearing, receive public testimony and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- recommending City Council consideration of an amendment to the Local Coastal Program consisting of a Minor Coastal Zone Boundary Adjustment to remove the approximately 0.5-acre portion of Gloria Jean Tate Park adjacent to Reservation Road (033-073-022) from the coastal zone
All of the resolutions passed by a vote of 6-0
COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF INFORMATIONAL REPORTS:
a. City Council, Design Review Board, Tree Committee, and other meetings of note.
___________________________________________________________________________
AGENDA FOR June 14, 2007. This information is given to you as a courtesy. Comments and opinions are accepted. Your attendance at the commission hearing is encouraged.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: Time will be set aside during the Public Hearing to receive oral comments on all items listed as Public Hearings. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to three (3) minutes of public testimony.
a. Planning Commission open public hearing, receive public testimony and consider adopting resolutions recommending City Council consideration of Tentative Map TM 2006-01, Use Permit UP 2006-01, Design Review 2006-01, and Tree Removal Permit 2006-02 associated with the proposed eight (8) lot subdivision and the development of an eight (8) residential dwelling planned unit development on the 0.34 acre project site located at 3115 and 3117 Crescent Avenue (APN 032-211-004 and 032-211-005).
The planning commission voted 6-0 rejecting/denying the resolutions. The recommendations against the resolutions will be before the city council on July 17th.
b. Planning Commission open public hearing, receive public testimony and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- recommending City Council consideration of an amendment to the Marina Municipal Code and Local Coastal Program deleting Title 16 Subdivisions in its entirety and replacing it with a new Title 16 Subdivisions. THIS ITEM WILL BE CONTINUED TO JUNE 28, 2007.
8. ACTION ITEMS: Action listed for each Agenda item is that which is recommended by staff. The Planning Commission may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to three (3) minutes of public comment.
a. None
9. COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF INFORMATIONAL REPORTS:
a. City Council, Design Review Board, Tree Committee, and other meetings of note.
_____________________________________________________
UPCOMING- IT IS YOUR CITY-DO NOT BLAME THE OFFICIALS IF YOU JUST “SIT THERE” AND DO NOTHING
City releases public participation schedule for review of project
The city of Marina released a new public participation schedule for review of the proposed Marina Station project.
The 320-acre project calls for 1,360 residential units along with substantial commercial, retail, office and business park space. The site is part of Armstrong Ranch on the northwest border of the city.
The developer is Creekbridge Homes. The project is scheduled for review by the Design Review Board, Planning Commission and City Council. Planning Commission hearings are set for 6:30 p.m. on June 28 and July 12, while City Council hearings are set for 6:30 p.m. on July 24 and Aug. 7.
For information, call project planner Derek Kantar at 384-7324.
___________________________________________________
AGENDA FOR MAY 24, 2007. This information is given to you as a courtesy. Comments and opinions are accepted, but will not be responded to by any person. Your attendance at the commission hearing is encouraged.
8. ACTION ITEMS: Action listed for each Agenda item is that which is recommended by staff. The Planning Commission may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to three (3) minutes of public comment.
a. None
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
a. Planning Commission to discuss the proposed Draft Subdivision Ordinance (Marina Municipal Code Chapter 16). A Planning Commission Public Hearing will be scheduled for June 14, 2007 for Planning Commission recommendation to City Council.
THE FOLLOWING is the Agenda for May 10, 2007. This information is given to you as a courtesy. Comments and opinions are accepted, but will not be responded to by any person. Your attendance at the commission hearing is encouraged.
11 PUBLIC HEARINGS: Time will be set aside during the Public Hearing to receive oral comments on all items listed as Public Hearings. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to three (3) minutes of public testimony.
a. Open a public hearing, receive any testimony from the public and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- approving Use Permit 2007-7 for a temporary project sign for the University Village Project located at the southeast corner of Second Avenue and Imjin Parkway.
b. Open a public hearing, receive any testimony from the public and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- approving Use Permit 2007-8 for a temporary real estate sign for the Cypress Knolls project located at the northwest corner of California Avenue and Imjin Parkway.
_________________________________________________
THE FOLLOWING IS THE AGENDA FOR APRIL 26, 2007. Your comments and opinions are appreciated.
8. ACTION ITEMS: Action listed for each Agenda item is that which is recommended by staff. The Planning Commission may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to three (3) minutes of public comment.
a.. Planning Commission to consider new appointment for Minor Subdivision Committee.
9. DISCUSSION ITEMS:
a. An interactive two hour Planning Commissioner training program will be facilitated by Ms. Marge Macris, AICP, Planning Consultant
10. COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF INFORMATIONAL REPORTS:
a. City Council, Design Review Board, Tree Committee, and other meetings of note.
b. Upcoming items scheduled for future meetings:
___________________________________________________
i. April 12, 2007 City Attorney presentation on Brown Act rescheduled to May 10, 2007
RESULTS OF APRIL 12TH AGENDA
THE FOLLOWING IS THE AGENDA FOR 4/12/07. Your comments and opinions are appreciated.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: Time will be set aside during the Public Hearing to receive oral comments on all items listed as Public Hearings. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to three (3) minutes of public testimony.
a. Planning Commission open public hearing, receive public testimony and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- approving Use Permit 2007-06 to allow for the serving of alcoholic beverages (including beer, wine, and distilled spirits) with a meal at the wild thyme delicatessen and café in tenant space Suite B and C located within the Monterey Bay Business Park at 445 Reservation Road (APN 032-212-043).
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MARINA APPROVING USE PERMIT 2007-06 TO ALLOW FOR THE SERVING OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES (INCLUDING BEER, WINE, AND DISTILLED SPIRITS) WITH A MEAL AT RESTAURANT (DBA WILD THYME DELICATESSEN AND CAFÉ) IN TENANT SPACE SUITE B AND C LOCATED WITHIN COMMERCIAL CENTER KNOW AS MONTEREY BAY BUSINESS PARK AT 445 RESERVATION ROAD (APN 032-212-043)
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting of April 12, 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Marina conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider a use permit, considered all public testimony, written and oral, presented at the public hearing, received and considered the written information and recommendation of the staff report for the April 12, 2007 meeting related to the proposed use permit; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed use is consistent with the Marina General Plan and the Marina Zoning Ordinance; in that an expanded liquor license for the restaurant and catering business within and an existing building at this location is consistent with land use designations set forth in these documents; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes and Guidelines (Class 5 – minor alterations in land use limitations).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Marina that it hereby approves Use Permit UP 2007-06 to allow for the serving of alcoholic beverages with a meal at restaurant (dba Wild Thyme Delicatessen and Café) in tenant space Suite B and C located within commercial center known as Monterey Bay Business Park at 445 Reservation Road (APN 032-121-043) as shown on Exhibit A and B subject to the following finding and conditions of approval:
Finding
1. That the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use applied for will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the city in that the serving of alcohol, as conditioned, with a meal at the existing restaurant within existing building in this location is appropriate pursuant to the Marina General Plan and will not contribute to a law enforcement problem.
Conditions of Approval
1. That this permit is limited to the serving of beer and wine with a meal at the restaurant and to the provision of alcoholic beverages (including beer, wine and distilled spirits) with the catering business associated with the restaurant.
***Condition #1 was deleted. A new condition granted the permit for the sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits at the restaurant. The permit shall be null and void as to the sale of distilled spirits at the restaurant 30 days prior to the opening of a school within 1,000 feet of the restaurant. It is contingent on review by Marina Public Safety.The vote of the commission on 4/12/07 was 6-0. In all other respects the resolution was adopted.***
2. That the restaurant shall continue to allow minors and shall not convert to a use that is limited by law to serving adults aged 21 and over, i.e., a bar or tavern.
3. That the applicant shall agree as a condition of approval of this project to defend, at its sole expense, indemnify and hold harmless from any liability the City and reimburse the City for any expenses incurred resulting from, or in connection with, the approval of the project, including any appeal, claim, suit or legal proceeding. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such action, but such participation shall not relieve the applicant of its obligations under this condition.
4. That this use permit shall be null and void if a class 47 liquor license is not obtained for the restaurant from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) within one year from the date of Planning Commission’s approval action on this use permit.
b. Planning Commission open public hearing, receive public testimony and consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- recommending City Council consideration of Tentative Map TM 2006-01, Use Permit UP 2006-01, Design Review 2006-01, and Tree Removal Permit 2006-02 associated with the proposed eight (8) lot subdivision and the development of an eight (8) residential dwelling planned unit development on a 0.34 acre project site located at 3115 and 3117 Crescent Avenue (APN 032-211-004 and 032-211-005). This item will be continued to May 10, 2007.
8. ACTION ITEMS: Action listed for each Agenda item is that which is recommended by staff. The Planning Commission may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to three (3) minutes of public comment.
a. Planning Commission to consider adopting Resolution No. 2007- recommending City Council consideration of the Planning Commission 2006 Annual Report and proposed 2007 Goals.
***This resolution was amended to permit the commissioners to visit projects prior to their completion to see if the project is in compliance. The resolution originally limited the visits to completed projects. The vote was 6-0.***
May 16, 2007 at 5:56 am
Frank, you are a shining star. This blog is a good idea. It certainly would be helpful to see the commission’s agenda one week in advance of the meeting, if that is at all possible. Having that kind of lead time would certainly allow people to think and analyze what’s going on and maybe even plan to attend a Planning Commission hearing! Also, it looks like you are wise to alert people that you can’t respond to opinions or comments posted. Although you technically could, it would be very problematic as every correspondence you participate in as a Commissioner on the blog would have to be disclosed to the Planning Commission at the next meeting, questions would be raised as to whether and how you are influencing the decision-making process, and it could easily descend into something where people are influencing decision-making processes outside of Planning Commission hearings, a path where problem areas abound (blog nightmare). Just using this blog to observe what people’s comments are would itself be a great thing and a real tool and boon to Commissioners, Councilmembers, and members of the public.
I do see a problem though in that certain elected and appointed officials in our fine City of Marina, have tended to periodically “go public” in newspapers regarding their positions on matters which will soon be pending before them. This is an area where the City decision-making bodies really need to improve because it can pose a serious Brown Act problem. I would recommend you add a disclosure section to the front page of this blog which states something to the effect that the public is welcome to post here, but that “IF YOU ARE AN ELECTED OR APPOINTED OFFICIAL (ON CITY COUNCIL, OR ON A COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE OF THE CITY), PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT POSTING IN THIS BLOG IS NOT ADVISED DUE TO BROWN ACT REQUIREMENTS FOR OPEN AND PUBLIC MEETINGS. HELP ENSURE LEGALITY — LET THE PUBLIC DO THE POSTING.”
As an aside to this, certain Councilmembers have sometimes come before the Planning Commission of the City of Marina, speaking on a project, and saying they are speaking as a “member of the public” or “resident of the City of Marina” instead of as a Councilmember. They have every right to speak in the capacity of individuals, but the practice does, I feel, pose difficulties in light of that (1) everyone knows who they are really — Councilmembers, and (2) that the project they are commenting on, could be a project which might at some point be appealed to the Council.
In other words, it’s not advisable on the blog, or in the chambers.